Administrative Register / Secretary of State Notices of Public Information NOTICES OF PUBLIC INFORMATION

Notices of Public Information contain corrections that agencies wish to make to their notices of rulemaking; miscellaneous rule- making information that does not fit into any other category of notice; and other types of information required by statute to be pub- lished in the Register. Because of the variety of material that is contained in a Notice of Public Information, the Office of the Secretary of State has not established a specific format for these notices.

NOTICE OF PUBLIC INFORMATION DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 1. A.R.S. Title and its heading: 49, The Environment A.R.S. Chapter and its heading: 2, Water Quality Control A.R.S. Article and its heading: 2.1, Total Maximum Daily Loads Section: A.R.S. § 49-234, Total maximum daily loads; implementation plans 2. The public information relating to the listed statute: Pursuant to A.R.S. § 49-234, the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (Department or ADEQ) is required to develop a total maximum daily load (TMDL) for navigable waters that are listed as impaired. The purpose of this notice is to publish the Department’s determinations of total pollutant loadings for TMDLs in the Water- shed that the Department intends to submit to the Regional Administrator for Region 9, U.S. Environmental Protec- tion Agency (“EPA”) for approval. The Department previously provided public notice and an opportunity for public comment on the “Draft Tonto Creek & TMDLs for e. coli.” in The Payson Roundup and Advisor, a newspaper of general circulation in the affected area, on March 24, 2004. The ADEQ has included a summary of all comments and the Department’s responses, in this notice. The purpose of this notice is to satisfy A.R.S. §§ 49-234(D) and 49-234(E), which require the Department to publish in the Arizona Administrative Register the determination of total pollutant loadings that will not result in impairment and the proposed allocations among the contributing sources that are sufficient to achieve the total pollutant loadings. 3. Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) A. Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Process A Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) represents the total load of a pollutant that can be assimilated by a waterbody on a daily basis and still meet the applicable water quality standard. The TMDL can be expressed as the total mass or quantity of a pollutant that can enter the waterbody within a unit of time. In most cases, the TMDL determines the allowable pounds per day of a pollutant and divides it among the various contributors in the watershed as wasteload (i.e., point source discharge) and load (i.e., nonpoint source) allocations. The TMDL must also account for natural background sources and provide a margin of safety. For nonpoint sources such as accelerated erosion or internal nutrient cycling, it may not be feasible or useful to derive a figure in terms of pounds per day. In such cases, a percent reduction in pollutant loading may be proposed. A load analysis may take the form of a phased TMDL, if source reduction or remediation can be better accomplished through an iterative approach. In Arizona, as in other states, changes in standards or the establishment of site-specific standards are the result of ongoing science-based investigations or changes in toxicity criteria from EPA. Changes in designated uses and stan- dards are part of the surface water standards triennial review process and are subject to public review. Standards are not changed simply to bring the waterbody into compliance, but are based on sound science that includes evaluation of the risk of impact to humans or aquatic and wildlife. Existing uses of the waterbody and natural conditions are con- sidered when standards for specific water segments are established. These TMDLs meet or exceed the following EPA Region 9 criteria for approval: Plan to meet State Surface Water Quality Standards: The TMDLs include a study and a plan for the specific pol- lutants that must be addressed to ensure that applicable water quality standards are attained. Describe quantified water quality goals, targets, or endpoints: The TMDL must establish numeric endpoints to protect water quality standards, which are based on beneficial use, as a result of implementing the TMDLs. This often requires an interpretation that clearly describes the linkage(s) between factors impacting water quality standards. Analyze/account for all sources of pollutants: All significant pollutant sources are described, including the magni- tude and location of sources. Identify pollution reduction goals: The TMDL plan includes pollutant reduction targets for all point and nonpoint sources of pollution. Describe the linkage between water quality endpoints and pollutants of concern: The TMDLs must explain the relationship between the numeric targets and the pollutants of concern. That is, do the recommended pollutant load allocations exceed the loading capacity of the receiving water?

Volume 10, Issue 20 Page 2014 May 14, 2004 Arizona Administrative Register / Secretary of State Notices of Public Information

Develop margin of safety that considers uncertainties, seasonal variations, and critical conditions: The TMDLs must describe how any uncertainties regarding the ability of the plan to meet water quality standards that have been addressed. The plan must consider these issues in its recommended pollution reduction targets. Provide implementation recommendations for pollutant reduction actions and a monitoring plan: The TMDLs should provide a specific process and schedule for achieving pollutant reduction targets. A monitoring plan should also be included, especially where management actions will be phased in over time and to assess the validity of the pollutant reduction goals. Include an appropriate level of public involvement in the TMDL process: This is usually met by publishing pub- lic notice of the TMDLs in a newspaper of general circulation in the area affected by the study, circulating the TMDLs for public comment, and holding public meetings in local communities. Public involvement must be docu- mented in the state’s TMDL submittal to EPA Region 9. In addition, these TMDLs comply with the public notification requirements of A.R.S. Title 49, Chapter 2, Arti- cle 2.1: Publication of these TMDLs in the Arizona Administrative Register is required per Arizona Revised Statute, Title 49, Chapter 2, Article 2.1 prior to submission of the TMDL to EPA. The Department shall: 1. Prepare a draft estimate of the total amount of each pollutant that causes impairment from all sources that may be added to a navigable water while still allowing the navigable water to achieve and maintain applicable surface water quality standards, and provide public notice and an opportunity for comment in a newspaper of general circulation in the affected area; 2. Publish a notice in the Arizona Administrative Register (this notice) of the determination of total pollutant load- ings that will not result in impairment, along with responses to comments received on the draft total pollutant load- ings published in a newspaper of general circulation; 3. Make reasonable and equitable allocations among TMDL sources, and provide public notice and an opportunity for comment in a newspaper of general circulation in the affected area; 4. Publish a notice in the Arizona Administrative Register (this notice) of the allocations among contributing sources, along with responses to comments received on the draft allocations published in a newspaper of general cir- culation.

Federal law only requires the submittal of the pollutant loadings to EPA for approval. However, the Department con- siders the pollutant loadings and the draft allocations to be integrally related and should be presented together to afford the public a complete understanding of the issues, outcomes and recommendations of the TMDL analysis. For that reason, the Department has combined the loadings and allocations in both the public notice in the local newspa- per as well as in this publication in the Arizona Administrative Register. B. Total Maximum Daily Load for Tonto and Christopher Creeks Please note that the numbers in the TMDL Table have been updated since the release of the first draft which was made available to the public on March 24, 2004. This update was made to accommodate a different presentation of the MOS. Project history In 1994, the Arizona Department of Game and Fish (ADGF) requested review of the nutrient water quality standards for Tonto Creek. ADEQ did not find reason to change the standards. As a result, the ADGF requested a variance for its National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) discharge permit for the Tonto Creek hatchery. From 1994 through 1996, as a part of an investigation triggered by the ADGF requests, ADEQ measured E. coli. levels in upper Tonto Creek and Christopher Creek. This data was sufficient to determine impairment which resulted in the 303[d]-listing, but was insufficient by itself to isolate sources or calculate loads; therefore, ADEQ supplemented the historic data by collecting additional data specific to the goals of source quantification and TMDL calculation. Analysis of historic sampling indicated that high bacteria levels appeared to correlate with high recreation times; i.e., summer holiday weekends. Based on this, ADEQ conducted source identification sampling during the summers of 2000, 2002, 2003 and the fall of 2003. ADEQ also conducted intensive bacteria sampling of recreation areas during the Memorial Day, 2000 and Labor Day, 2000 weekends. Sites were established at the beginning and end of the reach; upstream and downstream of potential point and nonpoint sources; and at several other accessible monitoring locations. Samples were collected to discern pollutant sources, the extent of impairment, and allow for the calculation of pollutant loads and allocations.

WATERSHED OVERVIEW

Waterbody: Tonto Creek Watershed Basin Size: 60 square miles

May 14, 2004 Page 2015 Volume 10, Issue 20 Arizona Administrative Register / Secretary of State Notices of Public Information

Designated Uses: Aquatic & Wildlife, warm water; Fish consumption; Full body contact; Aquatic & Wildlife, cold water; Agriculture, irrigation; Agriculture, livestock watering Communities: Payson County: Gila Land Ownership: USFS, AZ Game & Fish, private Land Use: Forest, recreation Potential Sources: Natural, Recreation and Septic Systems

SURFACE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS (WQS) (from Arizona Administrative Code, Title 18, Chapter 11) E. coli. are measured in colony-forming units per 100 milliliters (cfu/100ml). The applicable single sample standard is 235 cfu/100ml. There is also a geometric mean standard of 126 cfu/100ml, but in order to apply this standard, 4 samples must be collected from the same point (WQS) within a 30-day period (Impaired Waters Identification Rule - Arizona Administrative Code, Title 18, Chapter 11, Article 6). Except for one month (May, 2000 - out of several years of data) at only four (out of 25) sites, ADEQ doesn't have enough data from Tonto and Christopher Creeks to calculate a geometric mean in accordance with the rules. Numeric Target The numeric target for each of the listed pollutants has been set so that the most stringent water quality standard for the supported designated uses can be met. Due to a lack of samples to meet the geometric mean requirement of four samples per month, the numeric target is the single sample maximum standard: 235 cfu/ 100ml. SOURCE IDENTIFICATION, LINKAGE ANALYSIS AND SAMPLE COLLECTION POINTS The primary objective of this investigation was to collect data sufficient to isolate geographically and temporally, and quantify the primary pollutant load sources in the project area. All significant sources have been identified and link- ages between these significant sources and loads are discussed below. Other than the Tonto Creek Fish Hatchery (its permit doesn't cover bacteria), there are no known NPDES-permitted point sources in the subject basin; however, a complete review of all sources may result in the classification of some as point source which would then require NPDES discharge permits. In addition to natural background, there are several additional sources including basin-wide recreational uses and unincorporated communities/summer home clusters with septic systems located in the project area. Tonto Creek was monitored from its headwaters to the upstream end of the wilderness area just downstream from Bear Flats. The wilderness area between Bear Flats and has no previous monitoring data or non-natural sources in its approximately six mile reach. Christopher Creek was monitored in its entirety. Segments and Sources Linkage It is known that under the proper environmental conditions, E. coli can live, and even grow, outside of its normal mammal hosts in media such as sediment. The exact set of conditions permitting this are not fully known or under- stood, but this means that non-point source loads may or may not originate in the segment in which they are mea- sured. For purposes of this TMDL, ADEQ assigns loads to the segment upstream of the measurement points. Tonto Creek (starting at the headwaters) Tonto Springs is the perennial source of Tonto Creek and is thus considered natural background. Sample point SRTON073.00 is used to measure the natural background loading. Tonto Creek Fish Hatchery diverts the first 700 gallons per minute from Tonto Springs into its operation - which is nearly all the spring discharge. Discharge from the Tonto Creek Fish Hatchery passes through a pond system designed to reduce nutrient loading. The hatchery is the only NPDES-permitted point source in the project area. (NPDES #AZ0021211) On the hatchery grounds are several homes (with septic systems) for hatchery employees. Additionally, the area immediately downstream from the hatch- ery is used for recreation purposes. Sample points SRTON072.66 and SRTON071.72 are used to quantify the impact due to the hatchery and the other uses in this segment. Baptist Camp is a cluster of primarily summer homes approximately 1½ mile downstream from the hatchery. All these homes are on septic systems and are located within 1/4 mile of Tonto Creek. Dick Williams Creek (intermittent or ephemeral) is tributary to Tonto Creek between the hatchery and Baptist Camp. Sample points SRTON070.86, SRTON070.00 and SRTON069.87 are used to quantify the impact due to the Baptist Camp cottage cluster. (intermittent or ephemeral) is tributary to Tonto Creek approximately one mile below Baptist Camp. There is an U.S. Forest Service day recreation site and campground located at the mouth of Horton Creek. Tonto

Volume 10, Issue 20 Page 2016 May 14, 2004 Arizona Administrative Register / Secretary of State Notices of Public Information

Creek between Horton Creek and Highway 260 is heavily used for camping, picnicking, and fishing. The U.S. Forest Service had a developed campground at the Tonto Creek junction with Highway 260 approximately one mile below Horton Creek. This campground was closed in 2002 and obliterated in 2003 to make way for the new Highway 260 bridge as part of the highway widening project. The impact due to Horton Creek and the downstream recreation area was measured using sample points SRTON069.83, SRTON069.80, SRTON069.08, SRTON068.95 and SRTON068.77. Starting at Highway 260 and extending for about 3/4 of a mile downstream is the Kohls Ranch area, a resort and col- lection of primarily summer homes. These are all on septic systems and are located within 1/4 mile of Tonto Creek. Butting against the downstream end of Kohls Ranch is Camp Tontozona, a retreat center and sports training camp run by Arizona State University. Tontozona has less than 1/4 mile active frontage on Tonto Creek and is also on septic system. Due to their proximity, the impact of a living organism (E. coli) due solely to camp Tontozona cannot be dif- ferentiated from the Kohl's Ranch impact. The Kohl's Ranch impact is quantified using sample point SRTON068.00 and sample points SRTON067.95 and SRTON066.90 quantify the impacts due to both Kohl's Ranch and Camp Ton- tozona. About one mile downstream from Tontozona is the mouth of Christopher Creek. Beginning approximately 1½ mile downstream from Christopher Creek is the north end of the Bear Flats community, a cluster of mostly summer homes on septic systems, all within ¼ mile of Tonto Creek. The reach between Christopher Creek and Bear Flats has a num- ber of pools which can serve as bacteria storage areas. Therefore, measurements made between Christopher Creek and Bear Flats cannot be assigned to a source. This reach is quantified using sample points SRTON066.80 and SRTON065.38. Bear Flats stretches approximately one mile to the U. S. Forest Service Bear Flat recreation site and it's impact is quantified using sample point SRTON064.22. Christopher Creek (starting at the headwaters) For purposes of this project, the perennial headwaters of Christopher Creek are considered to be located at See Spring. The natural background load quantification was made using sample point SRCRS006.04 downstream from the springs. Beginning approximately 1 mile downstream from See Spring is a recreation area (fishing, picnicking, wading, etc.) that runs for about ½ of a mile along Christopher Creek. This upper reach area is easily accessed and has a parking lot with vault toilets. The actual recreational area boundaries are difficult to determine, but ADEQ considers the most heavily used portion as a possible pollutant source area. The impact of this recreation area is measured by sample points SRCRS005.70 and SRCRS004.47. Christopher Creek from about ¼ mile upstream from the old Highway 260 bridge to the top of Box Canyon is bor- dered by a mix of septic system-equipped resorts, cabins, vault toilet-equipped camp grounds, and is heavily used for camping, picnicking, and fishing. The settlement of Christopher Creek (a name used for the purposes of this project), a mixture of septic sys- tem-equipped resorts, summer cabins, and campgrounds stretching approximately 1½ miles along Christopher Creek. The new Highway 260 bridge is between this area and Hunter Creek, the mouth of which is about ½ mile downstream from the bottom of the settlement. Sample point SRCRS003.56 is used to quantify the contributions from this settle- ment. Approximately 1½ miles up Hunter Creek from its mouth on Christopher Creek is the community of Hunter Creek, a cluster of summer and year-round homes on septic systems. Sample point SRCRS002.85 is used to quantify the con- tributions from Hunter Creek. Just below the mouth of Hunter Creek is the U. S. Forest Service-developed Christopher Creek Campground equipped with vault toilets. Sample point SRCRS002.26 is used to quantify the contributions from Christopher Creek Campground. Approximately one mile downstream from Christopher Creek Campground is the R-C Scout Camp. This facility is equipped with vault toilets, septic systems and a central waste collection and processing system (ponds). The R-C Scout Camp impact is measured by sample points SRCRS001.49, SRCRS001.36 and SRCRS001.24. A popular undeveloped swimming and wading area on Christopher Creek is known as “Box Canyon”. Box Canyon begins approximately ¼ mile downstream from the R-C Boy Scout Camp and twists (a flattened 'S' shape) for about one mile. A series of samples were taken in Box Canyon over the Labor Day weekend of 2000. The runs between each of the upper-most six pools were sampled. This weekend was chosen because it is at the end of the recreation season. The sample points range from SRCRS001.23 to SRCRS001.18 and are numbered sequentially. Most of these sites were closer together than 0.01 mile, the minimum distance possible using the ADEQ site naming system. Near the bottom of Box Canyon is the mouth of an unnamed tributary draining an area that included a U.S. Forest Service quarry that, during the summer of 2003,was filled with rock spoil from the Highway 260 widening project. Approximately ¼ mile below the bottom of Box Canyon is the mouth of Christopher Creek on Tonto Creek. Sample point SRCRS000.08 is at the mouth of Christopher Creek. Critical Conditions

May 14, 2004 Page 2017 Volume 10, Issue 20 Arizona Administrative Register / Secretary of State Notices of Public Information

Seasonality is apparent as the stream freezes over for at least a portion of each winter and visitation is minimal during the “off-season”. Therefore, this TMDL applies from the third week of May through the second week of September (the recreation season) and is not necessary during the rest of the year or at times; e.g., high discharges, when human recreational contact is not possible. Most ADEQ samples were collected at relatively low discharges, but included precipitation-induced higher flows. Because comparison of the bacteria measurements to discharge does not exhibit a relationship, ADEQ will apply this TMDL to all discharges in the 0 to 100 cfs range. Discharges greater than this would pose an immediate hazard to humans, a hazard of such magnitude to render the bacteria hazard irrelevant. Thus, a TMDL intended to protect the FBC designated use for discharges greater than 100 cfs is not reasonable or necessary.

LOAD ALLOCATIONS AND TMDLs A TMDL is the total amount of a pollutant that can be assimilated by the receiving water while still achieving water quality standards. TMDLs can be expressed in terms of mass per time or by other appropriate measures. TMDLs are comprised of the sum of individual wasteload allocations (WLAs) for point sources, and load allocations (LAs) for nonpoint sources and natural background levels. In addition, the TMDL contains a MOS to account for variation in the sampling process. Conceptually, this definition is denoted by the equation: TMDL = ΣWLA + ΣLA + MOS

The Load Capacity is the numeric target, 235 cfu/100 ml., which is the standard. Thus, for the segments in this study, the TMDL can be figured:

1) If the sum of the mean of measurements plus the MOS does not exceed the load capacity (235 cfu/ 100 ml.), then the TMDL = the sum of the mean of measurements plus the MOS. OR

2) If the sum of the mean of measurements plus the MOS exceeds the load capacity (235 cfu/ 100 ml.), then the TMDL will be set at the load capacity (235 cfu/ 100ml.).

MOS The Colilert® system (produced by IDEXX Laboratories) for measuring E. coli. uses multi-celled trays and a “most probable number” (MPN) table to determine the bacteria concentration. The MPN table is based on a 95% confidence interval and the range of values possible varies with the individual sample; i.e., the number of large and small cells counted in the sample tray. This range varies from 0.25% to 5.75% for any given MPN. ADEQ has chosen to allow 5% for the 95% confidence interval, 6% for the range within the table and another 5% as a standard error to allow for variation in sample collection. The sample collection variation amount is based upon the Arizona State Laboratory allowance of 5% for general variation in process. This variation may include: 1) The lack of characterization of many of the minor sources in the subject basin. 2) The potential for unidentified sources to contribute pollutant loads or identified sources to provide larger loads than anticipated. 3) Precipitation events can occur in portions of the watershed with other portions receiving none and thereby resulting in runoff patterns and stream discharges different from those observed. Therefore, the total explicit MOS is 16%.

The MOS is applied by one of two methods: 1) If the mean of the measurements plus 16% of the mean of the measurements is less than or equal to the standard, the MOS is 16% of the mean of the measurements. OR 2) If the mean of the measurements plus 16% of the mean of the measurements is greater than the standard, the MOS is 16% of the maximum allowable load that will not exceed the standard or 32 cfu/100 ml. as calculated thusly: For ease of explanation, assume: WLA + LA = (W)LA then TMDL = (W)LA + MOS leading to: (W)LA = TMDL - MOS. If the TMDL = 235 and MOS = 16% of (W)LA then (W)LA = 235 - 0.16 x (W)LA, so (W)LA + 0.16 x (W)LA = 235 which means 1.16 x (W)LA = 235 leading to (W)LA = 235 ÷ 1.16 = 203.

Volume 10, Issue 20 Page 2018 May 14, 2004 Arizona Administrative Register / Secretary of State Notices of Public Information

Therefore, the maximum (W)LA that will result in a TMDL. 235 is 203, and the corresponding maximum MOS is: 235 - 203 = 32

Natural Background Natural background is measured at the natural background site and applied to all other sites. Tonto Creek natural background = 15 cfu/100 ml. Christopher Creek natural background = 5 cfu/100 ml.

TMDL Table (units are cfu/100 ml. unless otherwise indicated)

Tonto Segment/sources Mean of MOS WLA LA TMDL Load Load Reduction measurements Reduction (%)

Natural Background - below spring 15 2 15 17

Fish Hatchery/hatchery, septic 37 6 22 15 43 0 0%

Baptist Camp/septic 83 13 83 96 0 0%

Below Horton Creek 77 12 77 89 0 0%

Kohl’s Ranch/septic 64 10 64 74 0 0%

Kohl’s Ranch & Tontozona/septic 297 32 203 235 94 32%

Below Christopher 317 32 203 235 114 36%

Bear Flats/septic 338 32 203 235 135 40%

Christopher Segment/sources Mean of MOS WLA LA TMDL Load Load Reduction measurements Reduction (%)

Natural Background - below spring 5 1 5 6

Upper Reach 23 4 23 27 0 0%

Christopher Creek settlement/septic 98 16 98 114 0 0%

Hunter Creek/septic 43 7 43 50 0 0%

Christopher Creek Campground 204 32 203 235 1 <1%

R-C Scout Camp/septic 403 32 203 235 200 50%

Box Canyon 202 32 202 234 0 0%

Mouth 256 32 203 235 53 21% All segments include natural background and recreational use. Recreational use includes hiking, biking, camping, picnicking, wading, fishing and hunting. MOS = mean of all measurements from each segment x 16% or 32 cfu/100 ml if mean of measured + 16% is > 235. TMDL = 235 cfu/100 ml. for segments where mean of all measurements + 16% exceeds standard of 235. Load Reduction (cfu/100 ml) = WLA + LA - mean of measurements. Load Reduction (%) = Load Reduction divided by mean of all measurements.

May 14, 2004 Page 2019 Volume 10, Issue 20 Arizona Administrative Register / Secretary of State Notices of Public Information

Hatchery septic inputs cannot be differentiated from hatchery discharge; therefore, the WLA includes both. IMPLEMENTATION This investigation shows that water quality standards will be met when the load reductions are achieved. Identifica- tion of major sources of pollutant loading and quantification of contributions will allow management decisions to be made. Targets for Tonto and Christopher Creeks should include the inspection and repair or upgrade as necessary of all sep- tic and waste systems in the basin. The USFS has, in the last few years, added or upgraded toilets with vault units. The USFS may wish to determine usage statistics for the various recreation areas and design a system for controlling human impacts; e.g., installing more vault toilets, establishing hours of use, daily monitoring of bacteria levels, restrictions based upon discharge, etc. The U.S. Forest Service () and the Gila County Health Department may wish to establish regu- lar monitoring of E. coli levels for the reaches most likely to show a problem in the future. Monitoring should be planned to allow collection of sufficient samples to determine compliance with both the single sample maximum and geometric mean standards. The use of tracers; e.g., fluorescent dyes, may be useful if a means of differentiating between tightly clustered sources such as septic systems can be devised. Future studies may also include collection of the data necessary to permit the use of fate and transport modeling. To delist these segments, a minimum of five years of sampling with no exceedances or samples which show the load allocations are being met are required. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY Development of the Tonto and Christopher Creeks TMDL included public participation in accordance with 40 CFR Parts 25 & 130.7. Public participation included review and input from stakeholder groups. A notice regarding avail- ability of this draft TMDL report was placed in the Payson Roundup & Advisor on March 24, 2004. A 30 day public comment period followed the notice. A project presentation meeting will be held by the ADEQ in April 2004. Prop- erty owners; environmental groups; representatives of local, state, and federal agencies; and other interested members of the public were notified and invited to attend the meeting which seventeen stakeholders attended. No written com- ments were received in response to the public notice. This notice, in the AAR, will begin a 45 day review period. After this period, the report will be sent to USEPA for final approval. Written documentation of public participation will be on file with ADEQ’s Hydrologic Support and Assessment Sec- tion, located at 1110 W. Washington Street, 5th Floor, Phoenix, Arizona 85007. 4. The time during which the agency will accept written comments and the time and place where oral comments may be made: There is no public comment period associated with this notice; the Department previously provided an opportunity for comment on the proposed TMDLs. 5. The name and address of agency personnel with whom persons may communicate regarding the public information: Name: Robert Scalamera Address: Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 1110 W. Washington Phoenix, AZ 85007 Telephone: (602) 771-4515 (in Arizona: (800) 234-5677; ask for four-digit extension) E-mail: [email protected] Copies of the revised draft TMDL may be obtained from the Department by contacting the numbers above. The draft TMDL may also be downloaded from the Department’s web site at: http://www.adeq.state.az.us/environ/water/ assessment/status.html

Volume 10, Issue 20 Page 2020 May 14, 2004